“Bulkering” is a neologism that can be defined as “Putting together several complex ideas, oversimplifying and omitting large portion of the argument, discrediting sources for frivolous reasons, then thinking you have a good grasp on the subject”. “Bulkering” is different from aggregation, clustering, simplification, generalisation or good old “one-track mind”.
Here is how it’s played:
- Take a complex topic, such as geopolitics, global climate change, space exploration, or the origins of life.
- Absord the least amount of factual data or in-depth knowledge on the topic as possible.
- If you can’t avoid information, listen to arguments without weighting them or factoring in the lack of knowledge, the motives, the affiliations or the relevance of the examples presented by the source.
- Swiftly discredit a source if he/she presents a different point of view, if they have a typo in their book or online post, or if they ever did anything in their past that could cast any doubt in your mind, even if the action was 50 years ago and absolutely non-relevant to the topic, or if they look strange to you. If you find such a flaw, disregard them quickly by using the name of the newly discovered flaw. Example1: He might have a PDH in the relevant field and worked in that field for 50 years, but he’s gay. Example2: Don’t try to impress me with your numbers and big words, because you’re just a drugee (after uncovering that the source smoke pot 30 years ago).
- Discredit an argument or a theory if any part of it is found to be unproven or false.
- If anyone argue with you on the topic, be sure to impervious to resonning and snap back with a proverb or a clever line starting by: “my mama always told me…”
- Sit comfortably and relax. You have a good grip on reality.